Re: brin regression test intermittent failures

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: brin regression test intermittent failures
Date: 2015-06-04 16:53:47
Message-ID: 20150604165347.GH133018@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> Hm. Well, what this message says is that we ran that query using
> both BRIN and seqscan, and that in both cases no row was returned. Note
> that if the BRIN and seqscan cases had returned different sets of rows,
> the error message would have been different. So this might be related
> to the way the test table is created, rather than to a bug in BRIN.
> Peter G. recently pointed out that this seems to be relying on an
> index-only scan on table tenk1 and suggested an ORDER BY. Maybe that
> assumption is being violated on chipmunk and so the table populated is
> different than what the table actually expects.

Evidently there is a problem right there. If I simply add an "order by
tenthous" as proposed by Peter, many more errors appear; and what errors
appear differs if I change shared_buffers. I think the real fix for
this is to change the hand-picked values used in the brinopers table, so
that they all pass the test using some reasonable ORDER BY specification
in the populating query (probably tenk1.unique1).

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-06-04 16:57:42 Re: 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2015-06-04 16:34:23 Re: brin regression test intermittent failures